Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
---|---|---|---|---|
90.69 KB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Assistimos, na actualidade, a uma crescente preocupação com o papel das polĂticas de acção dos
governos na perpetuação de ciclos de violĂȘncia. No entanto, a violĂȘncia de Estado (da guerra Ă tortura,
ou Ă violĂȘncia policial) foi, atĂ© recentemente, um tema negligenciado pela comunidade criminolĂłgica
(Aas, 2007; Young, 2007). O presente estudo visa conhecer a real extensão da tolerùncia e legitimação
da violĂȘncia de Estado por parte dos cidadĂŁos comuns. Apesar de este texto se focar apenas nos dados
portugueses, este Ă© um projecto que estĂĄ a ser conduzido em quarenta e trĂȘs paĂses de todo o mundo
através do Group on International Perspectives on Governmental Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP).
Com o intuito de contribuir para o conhecimento dos processos de legitimação da violĂȘncia de Estado
por parte de cidadĂŁos portugueses, procedeu-se a uma anĂĄlise comparativa do posicionamento de 600
participantes face a diferentes tipos de violĂȘncia de Estado. Partindo da identificação dos argumentos
utilizados pelos participantes para legitimar ou rejeitar cada tipo de violĂȘncia, procurou-se depois
perceber em que medida estes posicionamentos se diferenciam em função do grau de normatividade
do acto (percebido como legal ou ilegal), da sua natureza (por exemplo: agressĂŁo ou morte) e do alvo
do mesmo (por exemplo: civis ou prisioneiros de guerra).
Nowadays there is an increasing concern about the role of governmentsâ policies in perpetuation of violence cycles. However, State violence (from war to torture, or to police violence) was an issue that was neglected by the criminological community until recently (Aas, 2007; Young, 2007). This study aims at knowing the real extent of tolerance and legitimation of State violence by common citizens. Although this study only focuses on the Portuguese data, this is a project that is being carried out in forty-three countries across the world by the Group on International Perspectives on Governmental Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP). With a view to contributing to understanding the legitimation processes of State violence by Portuguese citizens, a comparative analysis of the judgments of 600 participants towards different types of State violence was conducted. Based on the identification of the participantsâ arguments to either legitimate or reject each type of violence, we tried to understand in what extent those judgments differentiate according to the degree of normativity of the act (perceived as legal or illegal), its nature (e.g., aggression or death) and its target(e.g., civilians or prisoners of war).
Nowadays there is an increasing concern about the role of governmentsâ policies in perpetuation of violence cycles. However, State violence (from war to torture, or to police violence) was an issue that was neglected by the criminological community until recently (Aas, 2007; Young, 2007). This study aims at knowing the real extent of tolerance and legitimation of State violence by common citizens. Although this study only focuses on the Portuguese data, this is a project that is being carried out in forty-three countries across the world by the Group on International Perspectives on Governmental Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP). With a view to contributing to understanding the legitimation processes of State violence by Portuguese citizens, a comparative analysis of the judgments of 600 participants towards different types of State violence was conducted. Based on the identification of the participantsâ arguments to either legitimate or reject each type of violence, we tried to understand in what extent those judgments differentiate according to the degree of normativity of the act (perceived as legal or illegal), its nature (e.g., aggression or death) and its target(e.g., civilians or prisoners of war).
Description
Keywords
Contra-terrorismo InvasĂŁo Pena de morte Tortura ViolĂȘncia policial Conteur-terrorism Death penalty Invasion Police violence Torture
Citation
AnĂĄlise PsicolĂłgica, 30(1-2), 215-230
Publisher
ISPA - Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada